• Is DEI [Affirmative action...] Worth Saving?

    From Leroy N. Soetoro@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 20 21:38:24 2025
    XPost: alt.politics.equality, alt.california, alt.politics.usa.republican XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics

    https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/12/26/is-dei-worth-saving/

    Is anything worth saving from the State Department’s new but vast
    diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility apparatus?

    Executive summary: No.

    As the summer 2020 high water mark of woke recedes, some U.S.
    institutions, from big companies to colleges, are gently backing off DEI,
    at least by name.

    But not the State Department. On his first day, President Joe Biden
    “charged the Federal Government with . . . addressing systemic racism in
    our Nation’s policies and programs” via “an ambitious, whole-of-government approach,” writes Chris Rufo. Biden wanted woke ideology suffusing
    domestic and foreign policy.

    It’s hard to exaggerate how much DEI has infested every aspect of work, at
    home and abroad at the State Department. With action on DEI now required
    for every officer’s annual evaluation, there are now a lot of solutions in search of a problem to address—and write about.

    Overseas, every embassy and consulate has a DEI council, which scrambles
    vainly to think of something new to do, in an organization that has pretty
    much done “the work” already.

    In one large U.S. Embassy, an action memo now asks staff: “Have you looked
    at all DEIA considerations while putting together this meeting/event?” To
    get approval for the U.S. ambassador to show up, the organizer must
    confirm that “the guest list reflects gender, socioeconomic, and regional diversity.”

    Reaching a variety of audiences is a goal so obvious for a U.S. diplomatic mission that it hardly needs to be repeated in every meeting request. But
    many embassy events are tailored to a specific group—for example,
    children, disabled athletes, or women entrepreneurs. Achieving perfect
    “gender, socioeconomic, and regional diversity” in such gatherings may not
    only be impossible, it can also be undesirable.

    Domestically, there is anxiety to do something, anything, on DEI—and be
    seen doing it.

    The State Department recently advertised an upcoming “impactful DEIA …
    music event focused on eliminating implicit bias.” The artist, a
    department employee, promised to “emphasize the significance of each song related to DEIA values, inviting everyone to actively participate in this important dialogue.”

    “Together,” warned the event flyer, “we can listen, learn, and immerse ourselves in a transformative 45-minute experience that deepens our understanding of DEIA principles.” And most importantly, they can all
    include it in their annual evaluations.

    In the last two years, the department spent $77 million on DEI-related
    efforts. That sounds like a lot, but you can blow a ton of money hiring consultants and buying their books.

    Attendees to State Department training courses are often offered free
    books, bulk-purchased with your tax dollars. One of this year’s giveaways
    was a book called “Subtle Acts of Exclusion,” subtitled “how to
    understand, identify, and stop microaggressions.”

    “Microaggressions” are a dubious concept intended to label behavior that
    is unpleasant but not unlawful or actionable by the employer. Even that
    term doesn’t sweep wide enough for authors Michael Baran (he/him) and
    Tiffany Jana (whose “gender identity has evolved to a new intersection”).
    So, they invented the term “Subtle Acts of Exclusion” or SAEs, a category
    which casts the net of possible offenses ludicrously wide.

    According to Jana, she is “black, a gender nonbinary, a Christian, an
    invisibly disabled, a domestic violence survivor, and an LGBTQIA person,”
    who earns a living as a “global diversity, equity and inclusion
    consultant,” and is the CEO of a “collection of companies working to
    advance inclusive workplaces” (one of which sells her book at $17.95 to
    the government).

    Her co-author, Baran, believes he “walk[s] through the world with a lot of privilege” as a “heterosexual white man” and “a Jewish person.” Obviously,
    he knows little about how hiring and promotion works at the State
    Department, where any “privilege” would not be his.

    Baran and Jana’s book could fill bingo cards with woke jargon—“systems of
    power and hegemony,” “attributional ambiguity,” “structural exclusion,” “marginalized,” “emotional harm”—and it makes sure to flog the authors’ extensive list of additional training programs.

    The authors note that they rejected the working title “Death by a Thousand Cuts,” not because it is a cliche used many times before, but because the expression “could be considered a microaggression.” This was a “specific
    type of torture and execution previously used in China, Korea, and
    Vietnam,” they explain, and therefore the term is “culturally
    insensitive.” In truth, few Americans know much of their own history, let
    alone Asia’s, and I doubt anyone would ever have found this title
    offensive—but the authors live in a different world than you and me.

    The best proof of that is an example of what they call a “race and
    ethnicity SAE.” Baran is watching a football game with some friends, one
    of whom says “no problemo” before a field goal attempt. Baran notes that
    “there was no one present of Hispanic or Latinx descent,” yet he felt
    compelled to challenge the football fan for offending a hypothetical
    phantom audience.

    According to Baran, he “could tell that it really affected the thinking of
    the initiator deeply,” which was “exciting and promising.” My guess is
    that Baran’s friend was thinking about why he’d invited this sanctimonious killjoy to watch the game with him.

    When federal agencies must buy nonsense books to indoctrinate staff to
    solve a nonexistent problem, it’s time to call it quits. DEI has got to
    go. There are already offices and mechanisms to keep employees in line
    with both law and acceptable behavior and to remedy breaches.

    State needs to jettison the DEI complex, save money, and put its employees
    to more useful work.


    --
    November 5, 2024 - Congratulations President Donald Trump. We look
    forward to America being great again.

    The disease known as Kamala Harris has been effectively treated and
    eradicated.

    We live in a time where intelligent people are being silenced so that
    stupid people won't be offended.

    Durham Report: The FBI has an integrity problem. It has none.

    Thank you for cleaning up the disaster of the 2008-2017 Obama / Biden
    fiasco, President Trump.

    Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
    The World According To Garp. Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood
    queer liberal democrat donors.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From pothead@21:1/5 to Leroy N. Soetoro on Mon Jan 20 22:17:03 2025
    XPost: alt.politics.equality, alt.california, alt.politics.usa.republican XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics

    On 2025-01-20, Leroy N. Soetoro <democrat-insurrection@mail.house.gov> wrote:
    https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/12/26/is-dei-worth-saving/

    Is anything worth saving from the State DepartmentÂ’s new but vast
    diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility apparatus?

    Executive summary: No.

    As the summer 2020 high water mark of woke recedes, some U.S.
    institutions, from big companies to colleges, are gently backing off DEI,
    at least by name.

    But not the State Department. On his first day, President Joe Biden
    “charged the Federal Government with . . . addressing systemic racism in
    our Nation’s policies and programs” via “an ambitious, whole-of-government approach,” writes Chris Rufo. Biden wanted woke ideology suffusing
    domestic and foreign policy.

    ItÂ’s hard to exaggerate how much DEI has infested every aspect of work, at home and abroad at the State Department. With action on DEI now required
    for every officer’s annual evaluation, there are now a lot of solutions in search of a problem to address—and write about.

    Overseas, every embassy and consulate has a DEI council, which scrambles vainly to think of something new to do, in an organization that has pretty much done “the work” already.

    In one large U.S. Embassy, an action memo now asks staff: “Have you looked at all DEIA considerations while putting together this meeting/event?” To get approval for the U.S. ambassador to show up, the organizer must
    confirm that “the guest list reflects gender, socioeconomic, and regional diversity.”

    Reaching a variety of audiences is a goal so obvious for a U.S. diplomatic mission that it hardly needs to be repeated in every meeting request. But many embassy events are tailored to a specific group—for example,
    children, disabled athletes, or women entrepreneurs. Achieving perfect “gender, socioeconomic, and regional diversity” in such gatherings may not only be impossible, it can also be undesirable.

    Domestically, there is anxiety to do something, anything, on DEI—and be
    seen doing it.

    The State Department recently advertised an upcoming “impactful DEIA … music event focused on eliminating implicit bias.” The artist, a
    department employee, promised to “emphasize the significance of each song related to DEIA values, inviting everyone to actively participate in this important dialogue.”

    “Together,” warned the event flyer, “we can listen, learn, and immerse ourselves in a transformative 45-minute experience that deepens our understanding of DEIA principles.” And most importantly, they can all include it in their annual evaluations.

    In the last two years, the department spent $77 million on DEI-related efforts. That sounds like a lot, but you can blow a ton of money hiring consultants and buying their books.

    Attendees to State Department training courses are often offered free
    books, bulk-purchased with your tax dollars. One of this year’s giveaways was a book called “Subtle Acts of Exclusion,” subtitled “how to understand, identify, and stop microaggressions.”

    “Microaggressions” are a dubious concept intended to label behavior that
    is unpleasant but not unlawful or actionable by the employer. Even that
    term doesn’t sweep wide enough for authors Michael Baran (he/him) and Tiffany Jana (whose “gender identity has evolved to a new intersection”). So, they invented the term “Subtle Acts of Exclusion” or SAEs, a category which casts the net of possible offenses ludicrously wide.

    According to Jana, she is “black, a gender nonbinary, a Christian, an invisibly disabled, a domestic violence survivor, and an LGBTQIA person,” who earns a living as a “global diversity, equity and inclusion consultant,” and is the CEO of a “collection of companies working to advance inclusive workplaces” (one of which sells her book at $17.95 to
    the government).

    Her co-author, Baran, believes he “walk[s] through the world with a lot of privilege” as a “heterosexual white man” and “a Jewish person.” Obviously,
    he knows little about how hiring and promotion works at the State
    Department, where any “privilege” would not be his.

    Baran and Jana’s book could fill bingo cards with woke jargon—“systems of power and hegemony,” “attributional ambiguity,” “structural exclusion,” “marginalized,” “emotional harm”—and it makes sure to flog the authors’ extensive list of additional training programs.

    The authors note that they rejected the working title “Death by a Thousand Cuts,” not because it is a cliche used many times before, but because the expression “could be considered a microaggression.” This was a “specific type of torture and execution previously used in China, Korea, and
    Vietnam,” they explain, and therefore the term is “culturally insensitive.” In truth, few Americans know much of their own history, let alone Asia’s, and I doubt anyone would ever have found this title offensive—but the authors live in a different world than you and me.

    The best proof of that is an example of what they call a “race and
    ethnicity SAE.” Baran is watching a football game with some friends, one
    of whom says “no problemo” before a field goal attempt. Baran notes that “there was no one present of Hispanic or Latinx descent,” yet he felt compelled to challenge the football fan for offending a hypothetical
    phantom audience.

    According to Baran, he “could tell that it really affected the thinking of the initiator deeply,” which was “exciting and promising.” My guess is that Baran’s friend was thinking about why he’d invited this sanctimonious killjoy to watch the game with him.

    When federal agencies must buy nonsense books to indoctrinate staff to
    solve a nonexistent problem, itÂ’s time to call it quits. DEI has got to
    go. There are already offices and mechanisms to keep employees in line
    with both law and acceptable behavior and to remedy breaches.

    State needs to jettison the DEI complex, save money, and put its employees
    to more useful work.


    DEI is virtually the same as affirmative action but on steroids.
    I lived through it from the late 60's onward.
    When I was enrolling for college I showed up with all my paperwork and
    headed to the gym where there were many lines for various things like financial aid, scholarships
    and so forth.

    So I joined a line for financial aid as I was receiving a good amount.
    After about 10 minutes on the line, some lady who worked for the school noticed me
    and came over to talk.
    She told me "hon, you are on the wrong line".
    I responded something like "isn't this the financial aid line?"
    She said yes, but this is for people in the "college discovery and seek program" which I had no idea what it was.

    I asked her how she could tell I wasn't in the program, she smiled and said "look around you" which I did.
    I was the only white person on the line. Silly me I never even noticed.
    She pointed me to the correct line and all went smoothly.

    I found out later that the "seek and College Discovery Program"
    was nothing more than a fancy name for affirmative action and that it was an abject failure
    as the majority of students ended up dropping out early in their studies.
    And that was my introduction to affirmative action.

    Some things never change.



    --
    pothead

    "Give a man a fish and you turn him into a Democrat for life"
    "Teach a man to fish and he might become a self-sufficient conservative Republican"
    "Don't underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up,"
    --- Barack H. Obama
    The Biden Crime Family Timeline here: https://oversight.house.gov/the-bidens-influence-peddling-timeline/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruise@21:1/5 to pothead on Mon Jan 20 14:53:15 2025
    XPost: alt.politics.equality, alt.california, alt.politics.usa.republican XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics

    pothead wrote:
    DEI is virtually the same as affirmative action but on steroids.
    I lived through it from the late 60's onward.

    Gosh darn that Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment. Do not
    worry. The corrupt injustices will finish repealing rest of the 14th.

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruise@21:1/5 to Leroy N. Soetoro on Mon Jan 20 14:49:31 2025
    XPost: alt.politics.equality, alt.california, alt.politics.usa.republican XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics

    Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:
    Is anything worth saving from the State Department’s new but vast diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility apparatus?

    Executive summary: No.

    You no longer need to repeal the Civil Rights Act. Just have the
    corrupt injustices declare it void. Any law is cancelled if Thomas
    and Alito do not want it. They have placed themselves above
    Congress and the Constitution.

    Permettez-lui de manger le gâteau.

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From pothead@21:1/5 to Siri Cruise on Mon Jan 20 23:44:31 2025
    XPost: alt.politics.equality, alt.california, alt.politics.usa.republican XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics

    On 2025-01-20, Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
    pothead wrote:
    DEI is virtually the same as affirmative action but on steroids.
    I lived through it from the late 60's onward.

    Gosh darn that Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment. Do not
    worry. The corrupt injustices will finish repealing rest of the 14th.

    You are truly an idiot siri.


    --
    pothead

    "Give a man a fish and you turn him into a Democrat for life"
    "Teach a man to fish and he might become a self-sufficient conservative Republican"
    "Don't underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up,"
    --- Barack H. Obama
    The Biden Crime Family Timeline here: https://oversight.house.gov/the-bidens-influence-peddling-timeline/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)